Let law take its course

Let law take its course

With the memory of the so-called Monitor case still lingering in our minds, emotions are now once again heated in large sections of our community because of what is perceived to be blasphemous statements made against the Prophet Muhammad. As anyone who has read the newspapers in the past few days must know, strong reactions have been provoked among Moslem leaders by blasphemous remarks about the Prophet Muhammad, which the well- known psychic Permadi allegedly made during a panel discussion at Yogyakarta's Gadjah Mada University two years ago. The Attorney General and the police are now investigating the case.

In the meantime, conflicting reports have been circulating and varying conclusions drawn. Some have said that the soothsayer, who is a graduate of the University of Indonesia's prestigious law school, has branded Prophet Muhammad a dictator. On the other hand, Permadi himself and his lawyer Adnan Buyung Nasution have said that the statement about the Prophet Muhammad was abbreviated and taken out of context in such a way as to create misunderstanding.

Since Permadi's statement is reported to have been recorded on tape, the present police investigation seems to be focused on the recording and on the statements of witnesses. According to National Police Chief Gen. Banurusman Astrosemito, Permadi could be prosecuted under an article of the Indonesian criminal law code which makes it possible for anyone guilty of statements or acts that are offensive to any of the officially recognized religions in Indonesia to be punished with a maximum imprisonment term of five years. According to Gen. Banurusman, the police are still trying to accumulate as much evidence as is necessary for prosecution.

In any case, since Indonesia is a country that is based on law and because everyone is expected to respect the supremacy of the law and the presumption of innocence, care should be exercised. Clearly, pronouncing Permadi either guilty or innocent before the court has handed down its verdict must be avoided. It is in this context that we see the appeals for calm that have been made by the authorities in charge of the investigation. These appeals are not only relevant, but worthy of our serious attention because in facing sensitive issues of this kind, the authorities have so far always acted swiftly and competently. After all, allowing such sensitive issues to create unrest among our people will only lead to disunity.

The Monitor magazine case in 1990, in which demonstrations to protest an irreverent readers poll involving the Prophet Muhammad's name led to the closure of the magazine and the imprisonment of its editor, should be proof enough of the authorities' sensitivity in such cases.

One last word of caution: Both cases should also remind us that if one cannot speak scientifically or factually about religious issues in this country one should not speak about them at all. Some topics are simply too sensitive to discuss in public without taking extra care not to offend anyone.